Comparison of imaging modalities for their ability to detect carotid cavernous fistula tracts
| Modality (Fistula Tracts Identified) | Ability to Detect Fistula Tracts, n (%)* | P Value (Chi-square Test) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poor | Moderate | Well | Overall | CTA vs DSA | CTA vs MRA | MRA vs DSA | |
| CTA (n = 54) | 7 (13.0) | 13 (24.1) | 34 (63.0) | ||||
| MRA (n = 50) | 10 (20.0) | 26 (52.0) | 14 (28.0) | .002 | NS | .001 | .007 |
| DSA (n = 54) | 3 (5.6) | 21 (38.9) | 30 (55.6) | ||||
Note.—CTA indicated computed tomography angiography; MRA, magnetic resonance angiography; DSA, digital subtraction angiography; NS, not significant.
* Poor indicates neither size nor location of fistula can be defined; moderate, either size or location of fistula can be defined; well, both size and location of fistula can be defined.